Connect with us

News

National Justice Summit 2024: FG, International IDEA, others call For Reforms in judicial appointment processes 

Published

on

National Justice Summit 2024: FG, International IDEA, others call For Reforms in judicial appointment processes 

•Summit seeks reduction of CJN’s powers

By: Michael Mike

Federal Ministry of Justice, International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance (International IDEA), and other stakeholders in the nation’s judiciary have made far reaching recommendations that will address the issues of judicial appointment process, funding and eradicating delays in the administration of justice in Nigeria, at the just concluded two-day National Summit on Justice 2024.

The event was organised by the Federal Government in collaboration with the European Union funded RoLAC II Programme of the International IDEA.

In a communique issued at the end of the summit at the weekend, it was noted that the National Policy on Justice 2024 to 2028, will now serve as a roadmap, paving the way for a more efficient, equitable and responsive justice system for all Nigerians. 

Chairman, Joint Planning Committee of the Justice Summit, Dr Babatunde Ajibade, SAN, who read the communique, said the summit had three technical sessions.

Ajibade stated that the general consensus reached at the summit was that the role of the National Judicial Council in discharging its responsibility for judicial appointments into the Superior Court of record required significant review.

The stakeholders expressed concern about the fact that the Chief Justice of Nigeria, who is the chairman of the NJC is also the chairman of the Federal Judicial Service Commission, the body that initially reviews proposals or lists of candidates by appointment into judicial office. 

The summit pointed out the seeming inconsistency between the CJN playing both roles, as it would appear that he is recommending candidates to himself being chairman of both bodies, and being the person who appoints a significant number of the members of both bodies other than those who are statutory members.

There’s a general consensus by the summit on the need to reconstitute or propose  reconstitution of both the NJC and the FJSC. 
On the role of the State Judicial Service Commission in judicial appointmens, the summit concluded that there was a significant need to ensure that composition of the SJSC is more diverse, that it reflects the interests of the users of the justice sector. 

Stakeholders noted the fact that the current NJC guidelines may have subverted the intent of the constitutional provision, empowering the SJSC to make judicial appointments, because the NJC guidelines, rather than authorising the SJSC to prepare a shortlist of potential candidates for judicial appointments, appear to address that responsibility solely in the Chairman (Chief Judges of States). 

The summit therefore called for an amendment of the  aspect of the NJC guidelines to make clear that the development or preparation of shortlist of candidates for judicial appointments is something that is to be done by the Commissions as a whole and not just by the Chief Judges.

On the general approach that ought to be taken to reforming the judicial appointments process, the summit stressed that focus should be on increased transparency in the appointment process,  meritocracy and on meaningful performance evaluations of those who seek judicial office.
Also, it was recommended that Nigeria should consider the model that is currently being used in Kenya. 

There was a consensus on the need to codify the judicial appointments process, such that the discretion that is currently witnessed in the appointments process is reduced to the barest minimum. 
On funding, budgeting and administration for the judiciary, the summit resolved
that the current process for funding the courts was totally deficient as it was evident that the provisions of the Constitution as amended by the Fifth Amendment, authorising that funding for the State courts should be a joint effort carried out by the executive and the judiciary was not being implemented in any shape or form in the majority of the states. 

Clear recommendations were made that this was something that needed to be pursued and dealt with decisively, as the summit stated that funding of the judiciary at the federal level is much better than what obtains in the States of the Federation.

More so, the summit observed the need to professionalise the administration of the courts, as well as to appoint persons with clear administrative experience to be selected through a transparent process to administer the courts, and to separate the administration of the courts from the administration of justice. 

On eradicating delays in the administration of justice agenda for leveraging the rules of procedure and effective case management in Nigeria, the panel considered the importance of limiting the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, and ensuring that matters that would go to the Supreme Court would only be matters of significant national importance. 

The summit held that before a matter goes to apex court, it would only be by the leave of the Supreme Court, and that the automatic right of appeal to the will be severely curtailed and will be limited only to matters relating to the office and the election into the office of the president of the federation, Vice President and, and Governors of the States. 

National Justice Summit 2024: FG, International IDEA, others call For Reforms in judicial appointment processes 

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

News

Senegal President sacks Prime Minister Sonko, dissolves government amid growing tensions

Published

on

Senegal President sacks Prime Minister Sonko, dissolves government amid growing tensions

By: Zagazola Makama

Senegalese President Bassirou Diomaye Faye has dismissed Prime Minister Ousmane Sonko and dissolved the country’s government following months of growing political tensions between the two leaders.

The decision was announced late Friday through a presidential decree broadcast on state television.

According to the decree read by a presidential aide, President Faye “ended the duties of Ousmane Sonko and consequently those of the ministers and secretaries of state who are members of the government.”

No immediate replacement for Sonko was announced as of the time of filing this report.

The dismissal followed a parliamentary session earlier in the week during which Sonko openly criticised President Faye, further exposing divisions within the ruling political establishment.

Political observers said relations between the two leaders had deteriorated in recent months over issues relating to party leadership, governance direction and the management of state affairs.

Analysts noted that the development could introduce fresh political uncertainty in Senegal at a time the country is facing mounting economic pressures, including rising public debt and broader fiscal challenges.

The dissolution of the government is expected to trigger consultations within the ruling coalition ahead of the appointment of a new prime minister and cabinet.

Senegal has long been regarded as one of West Africa’s more stable democracies, but recent political tensions have continued to attract regional and international attention.

Senegal President sacks Prime Minister Sonko, dissolves government amid growing tensions

Continue Reading

News

Why the Diomaye–Sonko Split Became Almost Inevitable Amid Senegal’s Power Struggle

Published

on

Why the Diomaye–Sonko Split Became Almost Inevitable Amid Senegal’s Power Struggle

By: Zagazola Makama

The dismissal of Senegalese Prime Minister Ousmane Sonko by President Bassirou Diomaye Faye marks the culmination of a political rupture that many observers had long considered unavoidable.

What once appeared to be one of the strongest political alliances in contemporary Senegalese politics gradually evolved into a tense rivalry shaped less by ideology than by competing ambitions, institutional contradictions and the struggle for control of executive authority.

For months, tensions within the ruling camp had become increasingly visible. Though both men emerged from the same political movement and jointly embodied the rise of the PASTEF coalition against former President Macky Sall, the coexistence between a highly charismatic political mentor and a constitutionally empowered head of state proved difficult to sustain.

The crisis is anchored in a fundamental institutional reality:Senegal’s constitutional system ultimately concentrates executive legitimacy in the presidency.

While the Prime Minister exercises substantial governmental authority, the President remains the central pillar of executive power, deriving legitimacy directly from universal suffrage and serving as the supreme authority of the state.

Sources say that the conflict emerged because Sonko increasingly projected himself not merely as head of government, but as an alternative center of political gravity within the state apparatus.

Public speeches, political positioning and repeated demonstrations of personal influence created the perception that two competing executives were operating simultaneously within the same administration.

In highly presidential systems, such arrangements rarely survive for long.

Political theorists have often observed that leaders who attain supreme office tend to resist the emergence of rival figures whose popularity, influence or visibility may overshadow their own authority. The situation in Senegal increasingly reflected that classic tension between institutional legitimacy and political charisma.

Sonko’s political trajectory has long been built around a populist and confrontational style that resonated strongly with segments of Senegalese youth and anti-establishment voters. His appeal stemmed from a mixture of direct rhetoric, anti-system positioning, nationalist discourse and his ability to embody political resistance during years of confrontation with the former administration.

However, the same qualities that fueled his rise may also have contributed to his political isolation. Sourcds note that charismatic populist figures often struggle to adapt from opposition politics to the discipline and compromise required in governance. A political strategy built around constant confrontation can become difficult to reconcile with the institutional restraints of executive power-sharing.

Over time, Sonko appeared increasingly convinced that he remained the true engine behind the ruling coalition’s legitimacy and electoral success. That perception may have encouraged attempts to expand his political influence beyond the traditional boundaries of the prime ministerial office.

For President Diomaye Faye, allowing such an imbalance to persist carried political risks.

The removal of Sonko ultimately reaffirmed a basic constitutional principle, regardless of personal popularity, a Prime Minister remains subordinate to presidential authority in Senegal’s current institutional framework.

By dismissing his Prime Minister, Diomaye signaled that he intended to fully exercise the powers attached to the presidency rather than govern under the shadow of a more dominant political personality.

The decision may also represent an attempt to consolidate state authority, reassure institutional actors and prevent the emergence of dual centers of power capable of paralysing governance. Yet the move is not without danger.

Sonko still commands significant grassroots support and retains strong influence within sections of PASTEF and among politically mobilized youth constituencies. His removal could deepen divisions inside the ruling coalition and potentially reshape Senegal’s political landscape ahead of future elections.

One of the major questions now facing Senegalese politics is whether PASTEF can survive the split without suffering a major internal fracture. Political history across Africa shows that when alliances forged in opposition reach power, tensions often emerge over authority, succession and control of state institutions.

Some party officials and elected representatives may rally behind the President, who controls the state apparatus and constitutional legitimacy. Others may remain loyal to Sonko due to his personal popularity and historical role in the movement’s rise.

The outcome of that struggle could determine whether Senegal experiences a relatively stable political recomposition or enters a prolonged period of institutional tension.

Another key factor will be public sentiment. During years of opposition politics, confrontation and political mobilisation energized large sections of the electorate. However, governing presents different expectations. Many Senegalese citizens now appear increasingly concerned with economic management, institutional stability, governance reforms and social calm rather than perpetual political conflict.

That shift may strengthen Diomaye’s position if he succeeds in presenting himself as a stabilizing statesman capable of governing above partisan rivalries. At the same time, any perception that Sonko has been politically sidelined or unfairly neutralized could trigger renewed political mobilisation among his supporters.

The crisis illustrates a recurring lesson in political systems across the world. Conquering power together is often easier than sharing it afterward. The Diomaye–Sonko alliance was extraordinarily effective as an opposition force united against a common adversary. But once in office, the unresolved question of who truly embodied executive authority became increasingly difficult to avoid.

What began as political complementarity gradually transformed into institutional competition.

The final outcome remains uncertain. Diomaye may emerge stronger by consolidating presidential authority, or Sonko could retain enough political capital to remain a major force capable of reshaping Senegal’s future political balance.

Either way, the rupture marks a turning point in Senegalese politics and may redefine the future trajectory of one of West Africa’s most closely watched democracies.

Why the Diomaye–Sonko Split Became Almost Inevitable Amid Senegal’s Power Struggle

Continue Reading

News

Beyond the Frontline: Ashlee Momoh Foundation Restores Hope to Widows of Fallen Heroes

Published

on

Beyond the Frontline: Ashlee Momoh Foundation Restores Hope to Widows of Fallen Heroes

By Comrade Philip Ikodor

KADUNA – When a soldier falls in the line of duty, the echoes of the final salute eventually fade, but for the families left behind, a silent and grueling battle begins. While these brave men defended the nation’s sovereignty with courage, their widows are often left to navigate a minefield of poverty, trauma, and social isolation.

In a decisive move to address these challenges, the Ashlee Momoh Foundation (AMF) held a special outreach event at the Golden Orange Gate Hotel in Kaduna State on Thursday, May 21, 2026. The initiative sought to provide a lifeline to the families of departed heroes, framed not as charity, but as a profound national debt of gratitude.

The Chairperson and CEO of the Foundation, Princess Ashlee Momoh, emphasized that the AMF remains committed to ensuring no widow walks alone. She noted that the sacrifice of a soldier continues in the quiet hallways of homes where wives suddenly become sole providers.

“Many military widows face a daunting reality: sudden loss of income, housing insecurity, and a lack of access to specialized mental health support,” Princess Momoh stated. “Unless intentional interventions are made, these families remain trapped in a cycle of hardship that dishonors the legacy of the departed. Your story does not end in sorrow; it continues in purpose.”

Princess Momoh outlined the Foundation’s three strategic pillars designed to bridge the gap between loss and self-sufficiency:

Economic Independence: Providing small business grants, financial literacy, and vocational skills to restore dignity and autonomy.

Securing the Future: Offering scholarships and tuition assistance so that children do not pay for their fathers’ patriotism with their education. Emotional Fortitude: Establishing counseling and wellness groups to ensure widows are seen, heard, and sustained.

The Chairperson called for a “whole-of-society” approach, urging the government, private sector, and philanthropic organizations to join in collective action. While government intervention is pivotal, she noted that partnerships are essential to scaling the impact of these programs.

The event featured the distribution of empowerment gift items and the announcement of new scholarship awards. Prominent guests, partners and volunteers in attendance included Special Guests of Honor, Air Commodore Chris Dola (Rtd), PhD, and General Brown Yakubu (Rtd), CEO of Golden Orange Gate Hotel, both of whom delivered goodwill messages and also contributed immensely in support of the Foundation’s mission.

Beyond the Frontline: Ashlee Momoh Foundation Restores Hope to Widows of Fallen Heroes

Continue Reading

Trending

Verified by MonsterInsights